Clearly movies are real and you have no idea what you are talking about.
Printable View
Clearly movies are real and you have no idea what you are talking about.
In all seriousness one of the questions asked the director of Gravity was "what were the technical difficulties of filming in space?" by a mexican reporter. :stuart:Quote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787
I fast forwarded through most of it, only a couple of characters in the film made it boring and lacked atmosphere.
:mellow:Quote:
Originally Posted by samplehunters
I felt it was a slow film and with the 'small' number of characters, it was difficult to find any depth in the film, especially when most good films have multiple plots that merge into one giant story. I can see why people like it and respect the film makers who produced it as it is not something everyone would enjoy.
Not for me, but hey, that's just my opinion
Actually that's not true and majority of the movies considered to be great tend to have a focused vision.What you are describing is a particular genre of film which once upon a time was called a spectacle.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaybow
Also for the record, a spectacle is usually bereft of real depth.
the movie was visually great but from my point of view, the actors wasn't so good. Moreover, George Clooney is...
Don't leave me hanging like so many ideas of marriage and settling down.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFinch
Saw the movie and thought it was OK. Guess the engineer/scientist in me was thinking too much about how things would not actually work as shown in the film.
The movie was more of a visual spectacle than a deep meaningful story. Sure, there is some raw human emotion, but it paled relative to the 3D effects.